Summary Of Privacy: A Possible Solution To The NSA

While interpreting Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy? by Don Tapscott, I had found that this article was my favorite. When it comes to choosing is one should stay private or keep their information public, I feel like that is up to that individual one hundred percent. In Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy? Tapscott went over how many people should be more open and post more information on the internet to allow others to get a sense of what is going on. He believed Facebook is a “leading social-media site that promotes information sharing” making everyone’s life an open book for everyone to read and learn from. Additionally, to help is one is struggling with any mental health issues. Tapscott believes that by sharing personal information can

With the seemingly exponential propagation of inexpensive digital communications technologies over recent years, the general public is becoming more aware of the issues surrounding information privacy and government surveillance in the digital age. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry with a smart-phone has to be wary of how they use their private information for fear of that information being collected and used in a way contrary to their wishes. "Leaky" smartphone apps that transmit private information across the internet can be unethically used by government agencies. The issue of privacy is a balancing act; the public usually wants increased privacy and the government usually wants increased access.

The American people, including many big corporations such as Apple, disagree with the government collecting the personal information of the American people. President, Barack Obama, stated that intelligence committees and all congress members were briefed on the Patriot Act and its contents (Obama). The congressmen knew what the Patriot Act did involving the personal commutations in the United States. Nevertheless, the Patriot act was voted into being a law almost unanimously in the senate, 98-1, and 357-66 in the House of Representatives (Patriot Act). When Ed Snowden leaked that the NSA was obtaining personal information and how it was handled, the American people became shocked and outraged towards the government, and created a tension from the American people towards the government.

The article called, The End of Privacy by Adam L. Penenberg, demonstrates the easy access an intruder can have to someone’s private information in today’s digital world with just a few taps on the keyboard, and a phone. Making your private information unprotected and defenseless. Penenberg also describes transition from mainframe computers to desktop PCs making private information vulnerable. He also reveals that marketers and busybodies have more customer data than ever. He also illustrates the advances of search methods that cyber criminals have up their sleeve, how the misrepresent themselves in order to puncture through the credit bureaus, and the Federal reserve database, spilling out all of your financial information, social security,

In the book 1984, by George Orwell, privacy was a very rare thing and not a lot of people were able to have it. The book was based in a city named Oceania, which was controlled by a totalitarian government with its leader being Big Brother. In this dystopia, the citizens have no control over their lives. Privacy was never fully granted by the totalitarian government. To make sure the citizens were being loyal to their government, they were constantly being watched whether they liked it or not. They didn’t have a choice. Even the people’s thoughts were being monitored. The citizens were even being surveilled by telescreen in the comfort of their own home, excluding the exception of privileged Inner Party members. Throughout 1984, privacy

Officially given its name on the fourth of November 1952, the National Security Agency was developed to ensure the safety of American citizens (Howe 11). In an effort to prevent any unauthorized spying on innocent civilians a court known as FISA was created in 1978 to regulate the NSA. Up until the events of September 11th, 2001, the NSA was used strictly as a tool for foreign investigation to decipher international communications (“Frequently Asked Questions About NSA” 1). Twenty-three days after the Twin Towers fell, President Bush passed the Patriot Act (“Timeline of NSA Domestic Spying” 16). This act ushered the NSA into a position of limitless capability. Millions of Americans are having their personal lives followed, tracked, and recorded into mass data pools. This unethical acquisition of personal information is in strict violation of the Fourth Amendment. Immediate action must be taken by the Government to return the rights assured by our Founding Fathers and the Constitution.

Jill Lepore the author of the article “The Prism: Privacy in the Age of Technology” examines the concept of privacy in a world that has changed significantly from the 1800s. Lepore asserts that an age of publicity was ushered into society due to the shift from a world shrouded in secrecy to one inundated with transparency. Regardless, there have always been cases where privacy has been violated.

In today’s society, the word “privacy” has become ubiquitous. When discussing whether government surveillance and data collection pose a threat to privacy, the most common retort against privacy advocates – by those in favor of databases, video surveillance, spyware, data mining and other modern surveillance measures – is this line: "If I’m not doing anything wrong, what would I have to hide?" The allowance of the government’s gathering and analysis of our personal information stems from an inadequate definition of what privacy is and the eternal value that privacy possesses. The adherents of the “nothing-to-hide” argument say that because the information will never be disclosed to the public, the “privacy interest is minimal, and the security interest in preventing terrorism is much more important.” 1 In an era where the patterns we leave behind will inevitably become the focus for whatever authority, the issue of privacy affects more than just individuals hiding a wrong. In this essay, I will explore the state of online privacy in wake of the government’s warrantless data collection. Respectively, the nothing-to-hide argument and its key variants in more depth.

C. Mitchell Shaw wrote an article called "Personal Privacy Up for Grabs." The article talks about privacy and liberty being closely related. The government wants to have unlimited access to all digital data or information in the country and this brings into question issues of what is reasonable. This discussion goes through topics, such as, surveillance, encryption, and corporations that provide the public with encrypted devices to protect their information. We want to share with anyone, but our private pictures, such as family pictures and those sweet text messages for our husbands and wives we want to keep to ourselves as cherished memories, and while most of us have nothing to hide from the government, we do

The article, Accountability Vs. Privacy, written by the senior policy analyst of ACLU, Jay Stanley, talks about the police carrying body cameras and the guidelines that police should go by when using them. Stanley’s first guideline that officers should follow is to let the citizen know they are being recorded. He states that due to the fact that the body camera is attached to the police officer it may record places where privacy is expected like in someone’s home or apartment. The American civil liberties union of Illinois suggests that the police officer should notify the citizen that they are being reordered. The next guideline Stanley suggests is police officers should not be able to control what is recorded. According to the article, the

The United States is a nation that was established on several major guiding principles, including freedom, independence, and democracy. These guiding principles have become synonymous with American culture and have helped the nation prosper deeply since its dawn in 1776. One of the major core principles of the American culture that has come into question recently is privacy. Government agencies have begun pushing the boundaries of personal privacy through the justification of hoping to ensure national security. By keeping records of phone transactions, and personal messages, the National Security Agency and its supporters, argue that they are simply making an effort to prevent domestic terrorist activity. However, I would argue that the government's

The government has been proved to be spying on American’s privacy for many reasons that are not covered under the Fourth Amendment. This act of manipulation includes monitoring people’s conversations, examining belongings with only a subpoenas, and searching information of social medias; however, these acts are sometimes needed because of terrorist activity. A novelist, Jonathan Franzen, once stated, "without privacy there is no point in being an individual (source 4).”

In today’s day and age, privacy and keeping what belongs to you private, is a very sensitive yet important matter. Luckily, in the Bill of Rights there is a Fourth Amendment right to privacy and improper search and seizer. There are also many court cases that prove why that the right to privacy matters and plays a key role in our society. Another new major problem is that of wiretapping. The government will listen in on the phone calls of citizens, go through their internet searches, and read their emails and texts without them knowing it, and it is becoming a problem for most people. In today’s society, the government keeps itself very private to the public, but the privacy of the citizens is not a concern when the government violates the fourth amendment right, wiretaps phones, and ignores past court cases that stress the importance of the people’s right to privacy.

Nevertheless, such an argument can be disputed threefold, but first we must come to a loose understanding of what privacy is. Adam D. Moore defined privacy “as a right to control access to places, locations, and personal information along with use and control rights to these goods.” (Pg. 425) If this is the case then it must be the right holder who determines access to private information, therefore invoking the ‘nothing to hide’ argument is unlawful and an infringement of liberty. To reiterate this point Moore offers the following case. “Imagine upon exiting your house one day you find a person searching through your trash painstakingly putting the shredded notes and documents back together. In response to your stunned silence he proclaims

I love this app and I would definitely use it. When I go to Victoria’s Secret, I feel so embarrassed and uncomfortable when someone asks to help me measure my bra size. I think Third Love really helps customers solve this problem because they can use this app to measure their own size by following some simple steps at home. However, how can customers trust the company about their privacy? Even though all photos that are sent to Third Love are not saved anywhere, I still wondering the privacy problem. Today, the world is surrounded by technology, so no one knows what will happen in the future. I think this is a big problem for the company, and from the comments I can see many people asked the same question. Other than that, the concept of this